Go back and look at the dyno chart again. They don't cross at 5,252 RPM because the HP scale on the left vertical axis is different than the torque scale on the right vertical axis. HP and torque have to be equal at 5,252 RPM because HP is calculated from torque and the factor in the equation is 5,252. The lines will only cross in the graphical presentation at 5,252 RPM if the scale for HP is identical to the scale for torque.

If you look as 5,252 RPM on the HP line, and look at the left scale, the HP = 255. If you look at 5,252 RPM on the torque line, and look at the right scale, the torque is 255.

 

What's this mean? Another bad thing?

 

No.

lt1-xjs said you had a serious problem ("something is bad wrong though") because the torque and HP lines on your dyno graph don't "cross" at 5,252 RPM. I was simply pointing out why they don't cross at 5,252 RPM on your chart. I was not pointing out a problem with your car. I was pointing out a problem with someone's advice.

 

Ah ok thanks Injuneer, you've been great help so far.

 

Will this pump be fine?

Chevrolet Camaro 255 LPH Fuel Pump - Walbro - TREperformance.com

 

yes thats a good pump, but might want to consider upgrading the wiring going to the pump also. not sure of a part number but you can check the racetronix website for reference. they have a kit that comes with the pump and the upgraded wiring harness. very simple installation.

 

I went ahead and got the fuel pump 96 Ta recommended. 1993-1997 LT1 F-Body Fuel Systems from Thunder Racing

The $150 one.

 

You learn something new everyday, I tend to for get what I've learned. Regardless, by the sound of his car he has a small cam. 502, hotcam etc. I put down 265 / 305 stock, no mods, 309/ 336 with some bolt-ons. I still think there's a problem.

 

maybe when I change my fuel pump, I will regain power back??

Maybe that dyno is also retarded. They were saying my LT1 put down a "impressive" number because they said stock LT1 A4 put down 190hp...

 

I think you will notice a difference on the top end.

 

I would not recommend doing the trap door method simply because it is not that difficult to drop the axle and tank as long as you have access to jack stands and some common tools. I did mine in my garage in about a day. I also have the walbro 255lph pump, but purchased from Jegs. You will notice a small whine when the car is idling.

 

I did mine in my garage through the trap door in a few hours.

 

The fact that removing the pump through the hatch only requires some tin snips, a pair of pliers, and a small nut driver should be pretty indicative of how easy it is.

The fact that removing the tank requires a full set of tools, bench-pressing a 150-lb. rear axle, bleeding the rear brakes, removing the exhaust, and fumbling with an empty fuel tank (and PITA filler neck) requiring wasting whatever fuel is still in there should be pretty indicative of how much better option one is.

Having actually done both, the through the hatch method requires less than a tenth of the time and hassle of dropping the tank, not to mention if something goes wrong you can easily pull it back out. Would you really want to pull the rear axle, exhaust, and tank again, just because you forgot to tighten a hose clamp?

 

I got my mind set on cutting. It's no big deal to me. If anything its an improvement.

With the pump I bought. Will there be any wiring issues or is it plug and play?

 

It should be plug and play.

There is no "bench pressing" of the axle, put a jack under it, disconnect shocks, and lower it down. There is no bleeding of the brakes required, the lines are long enough, and no disconnecting is required. The only thing I considered a pain in the *** was the filler neck, and just having a neighbor or friend help guide it made it a lot easier.

In the end, it is your car, and if you want a hole in the trunk (which does not hurt the structural integrity) that is your call. Personally, on the next F-body I buy, if there is a hole for the fuel pump I will not buy it.